Boris Johnson- Prime Minister (Vol. 2)

[Dont like rolls]

El stovey said:

You don’t see anything wrong with the party that’s in government changing their Twitter is to make them look like a fact checking site?

I suppose you were happy with the conservatives dodgy editing of videos a few days ago too?

No, because that is NOT what happened.

"Dodgy editing of videos", oh you total Melt !

[chrispmartha]

Dont like rolls said:

El stovey said:

You don’t see anything wrong with the party that’s in government changing their Twitter is to make them look like a fact checking site?

I suppose you were happy with the conservatives dodgy editing of videos a few days ago too?

No, because that is NOT what happened.

"Dodgy editing of videos", oh you total Melt !

Eh, that’s exactly what happened

And dodgy editing of Videos, that happened also

[TTwiggy]

andymadmak said:

TTwiggy said:

andymadmak said:

So why are you going on and on about it? Perhaps outrage is a little strong - but really.... I simply don't see what all the fuss is about.

if Momentum had done it this site would be beyond outraged.

I doubt it. Really I do. Who follows Momentums Twitter feed anyway, other than those already committed to the cause? If you (generic you, not you personally) don't notice the feed changing its name, if you don't see the clear references to who it really is, then I'm not sure that I'm going to be swayed by your view either way.

I doubt many people, beyond the faithful, follow the CCHQ feed either. That's not the point. To make it clearer for you, had Momentum done this, and it had blown up in the media to the same extent, and, as a result, moved into common knowledge, then this site would have combusted.

[oyster]

The Tories have to be very careful.
Right now they are seen as the more untrustworthy party - which is really quite unusual for them to be seen as that in a historical context.

If the election campaign moves heavily towards trust/truth in the next few weeks, they might be in trouble with stunts like this.

[andymadmak]

El stovey said:

andymadmak said:

So why are you going on and on about it? Perhaps outrage is a little strong - but really.... I simply don't see what all the fuss is about.

Edited to add: I note that you also neatly avoided the questions...

You don’t see anything wrong with the party that’s in government changing their Twitter is to make them look like a fact checking site?

In the context as I understand it to be, No. My understanding is that CCHQ changed its own Twitter feed name during the debate and then swapped it back afterwards.
So who will have read this feed? A few hundred? Maybe a couple of thousand? And of those thousands how many would not have immediately spotted that it was CCHQ pulling a stunt? 10%? 20%? And what profile would the followers have been anyway? Floating voters? Tory faithful? Opposition looking for stuff to use? And what is the distribution of these people across the country? More pertinently, was anything that was 'fact checked' during that hour actually fact checked wrongly?
When you boil it down, hardly anyone would been influenced and the impact on the election is non existent.

El stovey said:

I suppose you were happy with the conservatives dodgy editing of videos a few days ago too?

Haven't seen that either, although I have read about it.
Given Kier Starmers machinations during the past 3 years he's sort of a fair target. BUT I will say that I do not like it when political parties of ANY colour deliberately lie and exaggerate or seek to create fear amongst the electorate. In much the same way that I condemn Labour for trying to spin the lie that the Tories will sell the NHS to the Americans. Can you imagine the fear that such blatant propaganda creates in the vulnerable?

[anonymous-user]

I have noticed that a few of the rightward leaning types are some sort of "that's beneath you" police. Who gave them a badge that allows them to decide what it is unbecoming for someone else to say? That someone else is someone that the badge wearer has in most cases never met and likely will never meet, and may be a person who is entirely fictional. "That's beneath you" is just a rather daft and wannabe haughty way of saying "I disagree with you". Why not just say that?

[andymadmak]

bhstewie said:

Like someone said above, Corbyn did this and it would get an entirely different reaction and rightly so.

That reaction shouldn't change just because it's Boris doing it yet for some reason it does.

That's your assertion. It's not a fact. I don't agree with your assertion

[andymadmak]

TTwiggy said:

I doubt many people, beyond the faithful, follow the CCHQ feed either. That's not the point. To make it clearer for you, had Momentum done this, and it had blown up in the media to the same extent, and, as a result, moved into common knowledge, then this site would have combusted.

That's your assertion. Your assertion supports your reason for making a fuss about this. I don't agree with your assertion. You have no evidence to support your assertion.

[andymadmak]

Breadvan72 said:

I have noticed that a few of the rightward leaning types are some sort of "that's beneath you" police. Who gave them a badge that allows them to decide what it is unbecoming for someone else to say? That someone else is someone that the badge wearer has in most cases never met and likely will never meet, and may be a person who is entirely fictional. "That's beneath you" is just a rather daft and wannabe haughty way of saying "I disagree with you". Why not just say that?

I need a new irony meter. Mine's just been borked

[bitchstewie]

turbobloke said:

bhstewie said:

Let's get Brexit done.

Surely you want to get Boris done

Odd thing is that as much as I had massive doubts about Boris's suitability for the office in the leadership election, I was prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt and give him a fair crack of the whip.

He gave a speech in Manchester on a Saturday right after he became Prime Minister which was excellent and I thought we might have turned a corner.

Since then we've simply had 2 months or whatever it is where almost literally every single day it's another pack of lies.

Today I've seen Dominic Raab, James Cleverly, and Brandon Lewis get trotted out to defend this latest little stunt.

There's something just wrong about seeing a Government so utterly pathologically incapable of telling the truth and that sort of thing starts from the top down.

Long winded answer to a simple question I know.

[chrispmartha]

andymadmak said:

El stovey said:

andymadmak said:

So why are you going on and on about it? Perhaps outrage is a little strong - but really.... I simply don't see what all the fuss is about.

Edited to add: I note that you also neatly avoided the questions...

You don’t see anything wrong with the party that’s in government changing their Twitter is to make them look like a fact checking site?

In the context as I understand it to be, No. My understanding is that CCHQ changed its own Twitter feed name during the debate and then swapped it back afterwards.
So who will have read this feed? A few hundred? Maybe a couple of thousand? And of those thousands how many would not have immediately spotted that it was CCHQ pulling a stunt? 10%? 20%? And what profile would the followers have been anyway? Floating voters? Tory faithful? Opposition looking for stuff to use? And what is the distribution of these people across the country? More pertinently, was anything that was 'fact checked' during that hour actually fact checked wrongly?
When you boil it down, hardly anyone would been influenced and the impact on the election is non existent.

El stovey said:

I suppose you were happy with the conservatives dodgy editing of videos a few days ago too?

Haven't seen that either, although I have read about it.
Given Kier Starmers machinations during the past 3 years he's sort of a fair target. BUT I will say that I do not like it when political parties of ANY colour deliberately lie and exaggerate or seek to create fear amongst the electorate. In much the same way that I condemn Labour for trying to spin the lie that the Tories will sell the NHS to the Americans. Can you imagine the fear that such blatant propaganda creates in the vulnerable?

Here’s the video if you want to watch it


https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/video/keir-starmer-in...

[bitchstewie]

andymadmak said:

bhstewie said:

Like someone said above, Corbyn did this and it would get an entirely different reaction and rightly so.

That reaction shouldn't change just because it's Boris doing it yet for some reason it does.

That's your assertion. It's not a fact. I don't agree with your assertion

The place practically went into meltdown because Diane Abbott drank a can of Mohito on a train.

So I'll respectfully disagree.

[anonymous-user]

andymadmak said:

Breadvan72 said:

I have noticed that a few of the rightward leaning types are some sort of "that's beneath you" police. Who gave them a badge that allows them to decide what it is unbecoming for someone else to say? That someone else is someone that the badge wearer has in most cases never met and likely will never meet, and may be a person who is entirely fictional. "That's beneath you" is just a rather daft and wannabe haughty way of saying "I disagree with you". Why not just say that?

I need a new irony meter. Mine's just been borked

Find a single instance of me telling someone else that what they have just said is beneath them, and a charity that you like will get fifty quid.

[TTwiggy]

andymadmak said:

TTwiggy said:

I doubt many people, beyond the faithful, follow the CCHQ feed either. That's not the point. To make it clearer for you, had Momentum done this, and it had blown up in the media to the same extent, and, as a result, moved into common knowledge, then this site would have combusted.

That's your assertion. Your assertion supports your reason for making a fuss about this. I don't agree with your assertion. You have no evidence to support your assertion.

Ok...

Would you agree or disagree with the notion that PHs, and NP&E in particular, is more right-leaning than left-leaning?

Would you agree or disagree with the notion that NP&E is populated by more Tory/Brexit supporting posters than Labour/Pro-EU supporters?

Would you agree or disagree that Labour/left-wing politicians and policies come under more scrutiny and attack that Conservative/right-wing politicians and policies on here?

Given the above, how do you think a similar stunt by Momentum/Labour HQ would have been received on here? By a warm round of applause?

[andymadmak]

chrispmartha said:

Here’s the video if you want to watch it


https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/video/keir-starmer-in...

Thanks. First time I have seen it. First impressions? The Conservative 'edit' simply highlights very concisely the reality of Starmers position. Granted, he did not pause and look answerless in the unedited video, but the bottom line is that whilst he actually continued to make noises, he didn't actually have answers to the questions - which is sort of the point of the edit.

That being said, I don't like this kind of thing, so I do condemn it to a degree. It's a sort of FTFY approach to political debate, and that's not a good thing.
I would have been tempted just to keep looping Starmers nonsensical answers, - for me that would have better highlighted the weakness of the Labour position. Is that what Labour supporters are really miffed about? The fact that people can so easily spot the 'emperors new clothes' reality of their Brexit position?

[bitchstewie]

andymadmak said:

Thanks. First time I have seen it. First impressions? The Conservative 'edit' simply highlights very concisely the reality of Starmers position. Granted, he did not pause and look answerless in the unedited video, but the bottom line is that whilst he actually continued to make noises, he didn't actually have answers to the questions - which is sort of the point of the edit.

Come again?

[andymadmak]

TTwiggy said:

Ok...

Would you agree or disagree with the notion that PHs, and NP&E in particular, is more right-leaning than left-leaning?

I agree that contributors to PH and NP&E in particular tend to be more right leaning than left leaning

TTwiggy said:

Would you agree or disagree with the notion that NP&E is populated by more Tory/Brexit supporting posters than Labour/Pro-EU supporters?

Certainly - although I find it interesting that you conflate Labour support with being Pro EU. The polls don't necessarily support you on that. (or that Tory = Brexit for that matter)

TTwiggy said:

Would you agree or disagree that Labour/left-wing politicians and policies come under more scrutiny and attack that Conservative/right-wing politicians and policies on here?

To a degree, yes, due to the nature of the participants. But I will also say that crap Conservative policies (when they emerge from time to time) also get a savaging here too, often by Conservative minded posters. This is not quite the Conservative echo chamber that you're trying to paint it to be.

TTwiggy said:

Given the above, how do you think a similar stunt by Momentum/Labour HQ would have been received on here? By a warm round of applause?

I honestly don't know. I really don't think it would have attracted the kind of squawking that we're seeing this morning. I could be wrong in that. But I can only tell you what I think. My own opinion would have been the same as it is now. What would shift my view to greater ire would be if CCHQ (or in your example Momentum) had done the following:

1. Set up an entirely new bogus fact check account and tried to pass that off as the real thing
2. Fact checked things incorrectly (in whichever account they had used)

[andymadmak]

bhstewie said:

andymadmak said:

Thanks. First time I have seen it. First impressions? The Conservative 'edit' simply highlights very concisely the reality of Starmers position. Granted, he did not pause and look answerless in the unedited video, but the bottom line is that whilst he actually continued to make noises, he didn't actually have answers to the questions - which is sort of the point of the edit.

Come again?

The bit you didn't bolden answers your question

[amusingduck]

bhstewie said:

andymadmak said:

bhstewie said:

Like someone said above, Corbyn did this and it would get an entirely different reaction and rightly so.

That reaction shouldn't change just because it's Boris doing it yet for some reason it does.

That's your assertion. It's not a fact. I don't agree with your assertion

The place practically went into meltdown because Diane Abbott drank a can of Mohito on a train.

So I'll respectfully disagree.

Practically a meltdown, that's how you remember it?! We posted in that thread at about the same time, and my recollection of it was that the vast majority were pretty apathetic.

A quick scan of the thread seems to corroborate -

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

Edited by amusingduck on Wednesday 20th November 14:30

[TTwiggy]

andymadmak said:

Certainly - although I find it interesting that you conflate Labour support with being Pro EU. The polls don't necessarily support you on that. (or that Tory = Brexit for that matter)

I did that for brevity, but you are correct of course. Thank you for your considered responses to everything else - I guess we're in 'agree to disagree' territory.